perhaps a little insight into the T206 Wagner genesis

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I was reading through Harry Grayson's classic "They Played The Game" (a 1944 collection of player profiles) and came across the following:

John Gruber, late official scorer in Pittsburgh, was offered $10 for a picture of Wagner that could be put in cigarette packages. Gruber wrote Wagner, received this reply: "Dear John: I don't want my picture in cigarettes, but I don't want you to lose $10, so I'm enclosing check for that sum." Gruber framed the check.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I have read that before and always thought it was some insight into his thinking. In keeping with nostalgia here is the intro in the American Card Catalog. I think it would help if we all keep this in mind while we are collecting (and I'm one to talk). There is probably a little more monetary emphasis today, than in the past, so naturally there is a little more stress than intended with the advent of card collecting. The excerpt from the initial intro in the ACC:

"A Card Collection is a magic carpet that takes you away from work-a-day cares to havens of relaxing quietude where you can relive the pleasures and adventures of a past day- brought to life in vivid picture and prose. Here is a phase of our heritage without which history has no full meaning, and only history can help man to understand the past and prepare for the future. This is history from an original source."

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The major difference in the hobby today vs. yesterday according to Leon's post is that in the past, card collecting was a form of relaxation to take one away from the stresses of everyday life; while today collecting offers everyone a chance to stress themselves out a little more fighting and bickering and backstabbing over the small supply of available material. We can never go back to the price levels of the past, but wouldn't it be nice if collectors could go back to the mind-set of days gone by: that collecting should be a hobby and a form of relaxation, not a continuation of all the aggressive and anti-social behavior that many of us exercise in our daily lives.

[Archive]

Posted By: Patrick McMenemy

Very well said Barry!

I include myself among those lucky enough to still enjoy this pursuit as a hobby.

Patrick

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

The joy of when this hobby was in first starting
in the 1970's thru the early '80s. The curiosity
that motivated us to research unknown and uncon-
firmed sets or individual cards; it is just about
all gone. I, personally, long for those days to
return; but alas, card collecting has become a
"mercenary" hobby to many.

The better part of this Forum has certainly helped
to bring back some of the "intellectual interplay"
that existed 25 - 35 years ago.

Barry, thanks for your comments. You hit a HR over
the 461 Ft. CF wall at the old Yankee Stadium.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Ted- did I reach one of the monuments?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Yes... but they found cork in your bat.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Except I remember just the same sort of mercenary, competitive, agressive attitudes back then. Only it wasn't money, it was supply of cards where the competition centered. We all combed antique stores, flea markets, etc., chasing down material in competition with our peers. And you better believe that when we got really good cards that our peers wanted, we held them for heavy ransoms--in cardboard. Let's not rose tint the past too heavily; I was there too and I remember how jealously we all guarded our resources and supplies (like the antique store I found that had a big box of old cards), or being "forced" into deals where I'd give 30-40 cards for one card that I really needed--the equivalent of a top-all bid today.

The main difference I see now is that the value of these items has grown so much that it has attracted a whole class of miscreant that simply wasn't interested when the values were low. These people don't like baseball history or card collecting per se. They are the sort of people who would otherwise be selling coins, real estate semimars, drugs or bootlegged concert CDs but instead deal in doctored cards, reprints, fakes, slabs, etc.. You can always ID them; they are concerned only with getting it to slab and what's it worth when they do. I think it is people like this that are responsible for most of the stress and fights of the hobby.

If you want things to go back to the way they were 30 years ago, sorry, won't happen. But if you want to take the stress and bitchiness out of collecting as it exists today, consider changing your circle of card friends. One thing I've learned in 9 years operating my own practice is that another client will come along if one walks. From time to time I find it necessary to "fire" a client. Usually, it is because I just do not like them and do not enjoy working with them. Life is too short to stress yourself out voluntarily dealing with idiots. This is a hobby (as some of my friends recently reminded me). When you come across people who treat collecting as an opportunity to extend their antisocial tendencies, stop interacting with them. If someone cheats a friend of yours, ostracize them. If someone is too agressive for your tastes, don't get into a debate with them. There is no percentage in it. If a person is too concerned with money, refuse to rise to their what's-it-worth bait and ignore them. Do whatever it takes to maximize the enjoyment of the hobby and minimize the stresses by removing irritants from your experience.

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

Was a major contributor to the portfolio and stock market mindset of what was mostly a hobby.
In the mid 1980's, when the slabbers slipped over to the sports card hobby from what was the numistmatic hobby, you could forcast what was about to happen.
My sublimation was being invaded, and that it would be smart to pick up on cards that I needed for my sets while the new breed studied the intracacies of the numerology slabs, and what cards should go into their portfolios.

Mind you, to create a portfolio is not a crime, but let's call it what it is.
One either goes to a stock broker and buy US Steel, or you can have fun and buy sports cards and hope that your investment goes up.
In any case, you don't have to pay a stock broker, BUT then again, you might have to pay the juice.

Even though I am now retired, I am happy to say that I still have the glee, enjoyment and satisfaction whenever I add a needed card to my set.
That was the predominant intention when I first started.
To get away from what drains us, and have some fun without creating another job.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Adam, nobody expects things to go back the way they were in the 80's, but the hobby certainly moved at an easier pace back then so I have to disagree with you to some degree. I think there was a lot more trading, it was a lot easier to get material as the stuff was worth less then and we all used to let things slide just a little. Sure, everyone valued their personal collections but I do not remember the hobby being even remotely as competitive as it is today. And I can recall going to the Willow Grove shows back then and knew I would find a ton of stuff and come home with a briefcase full of good material. Now I wouldn't even waste the gas money to drive there. Completely different hobby then, slower pace, and I will also add that nearly everyone who were my major trading, buying and selling partners from back then have in the majority dropped out of the hobby or at minimum are very disillusioned with how it is today. Nobody expects time to travel backwards, I'm just saying that for me and many others much of the fun is long gone. And so many of the vintage cards have become so ungodly expensive and will continue to get even more so that I realize that if it's a choice between keeping something or selling it, I think I would rather just have the money and let someone else own it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

And, I will add to your...."vintage cards have become so
expensive".....that it has discouraged the enthusiasm of
collecting entire sets that was the major interest which
flourished in this hobby throughout the 1970's and most
of the 1980's. Since the mid-1990's (coincident with the
start of card grading) the set collectors have diminished
significantly.

There exists a totally different mind set in the hobby now.
And, of course most of us can change and "go with the flow".

Furthermore, most of us are intelligent enough to avoid the
unfriendly "dudes" that Adam eludes to; who just generate
tension when trying to deal with them.

P.S.....Barry

Your Home Run soared way beyond the Monuments. Recall the
Monuments in the ole Stadium were in "Death Valley" just
before the 457 Ft. marker in left-center field.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Thanks Ted- but Hal accused me of using a corked bat. Hey, what does he expect from a guy who weighs 145 lbs.- I need to find an edge somewhere!

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

1st.....Barry, just tell Hal to take the "corked" bat and
stuff it; thats old-tech. The neo-technology is "STEROIDS"
then you too can be an instant 200 lb slugger.

ADAM

Sorry, but I am a skeptic when it comes to "myths" in this
hobby purporting to explain why certain sports cards in the
hobby have become scarce. A perfect example of this is the
old "broken printing plates" theory. During the 1970's (and
into the early '80s) the story explaining the scarcity of
the 1954 Bowman Ted Williams (#66) was exactly this.

In 1985 I de-bunked this myth. A dealer from South Jersey cal-
led me to look at a bunch of tin printing plates that he had
acquired. I was amazed to see original 1954 Bowman printer's
plates. All 7 of this set's 32-card plates were in excellent
condition. And sure enough on the 3rd plate was a clean
impression of the Ted Williams card. Furthermore, he had an
an extra printer's (32-card) plate; and, guess what ?
It was a perfect duplicate of the 3rd plate. Here we were
staring at two sets of plates with Ted Williams image on them.
He had acquired them from an old Bowman Gum Co. employee.

So, why is this card (#66) rare, I have a good theory on it;
but, I will save it for another discussion. Incidently, these
plates went into the Barry Halper collection. I could not af-
ford to buy them then and I knew Barry, so I called him.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

The card is rare because he was under contract to Topps at the time and litigation was threatened. The broken plate story was the T206 Plank explanation.

[Archive]

Posted By: BlackSoxFan..

What a fantastic topic this has become.... although I am relatively young ... I am begining to get to the age where i too can "recall the days of yester year" ... and as previously stated ... let's not be so foolish as to think that things before were always better simply because they came first and were not what they are now.
I can certainly be said to have "mercantile interests" with my presence in not only this hobby, but many others (lighters, fountain pens, watches ... etc...etc...). For me though, it's not about buying low and selling high, its about providing a service....since what i sell is other people's goods. The most valuable thing about my company is our time! There are far more people out there that do not have the time than people who do have the time. That's what I'm paid for and that's why I'm able to make money. I am the son of a collector, I am a collector, and I hope to pass on this bug to my younger brother, and maybe one day my own child. People like me have always existed in the hobby world. However, the crooks, snakes, and greedy money men (and women) have always been there as well.
I think what it comes down to, as with anything in life, is perspective. One interesting thing i have started to realize, but have not yet had the opportunity to explore is this idea of a flooded market. Now don't get me wrong, i certainly think that there is something far more interesting, and far more valuable (and not in the monetary sense) in a 90-year-old piece of card board than in a modern piece.... but how many hundereds of different issues of cards were published at the turn of the century. A TON!!!! Just count the number of issues available in one year back in the day! Now we all give the modern producers a hard time (myself included) because of the sheer number of products that they produce and because they are quick to chop up a priceless piece of memorabilia just to make a buck. But was it really that much different back then? Also, what is more appealing to you... the idea of a Tobacco company pushing their pack of cigarettes with the use of heroes from our national past-time ... or a card company pushing their pack of cards because it depicts the national past-time. Did you ever stop to think what the public would say if P&G purchased Topps and started to produce baseball cards? What would happen if they used one of their subsidiaries products (let's say a pack of cigarettes) as the sole method of distribution??? It's not going to happen, but i think it brings me back to my original point ... maybe the times that have pasted aren't as pure as we think they are. I'm acting more as devils advocate here as i have actually answered for myself many of the reasons why I feel the way I do about the products of today.
As for the advent of the internet and the creation of eCommerce .... it is what it is. As much as I despise certain people on the net for their sales tactics ... the benefits for me have far out weighed the negatives. I don't have time to go to the flea market on weekends, i don't have time go to a weekly card show... so in that respect alone, because I am almost always at a computer (sucks i know ... i really like the outdoors and activities and such), it is easy for me to check out ebay ... i have my field searches saved into a little app/web utility i built that allows me to search without having to go to my ebay every time i want ... also, I would find it hard to believe that someone such as myself would be able to gather such a diverse collection of rare cards if i did not have the internet ... even now... I only go to one card show a year (oh .. i'm going to two this year - YEAH!!!!). Of course, the funny thing is... i found my best card about 10 years ago at a card show. It is what it is, for better or worse, but i'm not so sure that anyone on here can really offer a true perspective on the cards we all love b/c any of use who were alive in 1910 sure as heck weren't old enough to have any perspective on the hobby at that time.


Regards,

Black Sox Fan

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

email me

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

ADAM W.

The contractual dispute between Topps & Bowman already existed
prior to the 1954 Ted Williams (TW) card. Sy Berger of Topps
was an avid Williams fan and forced Bowman to discontinue mar-
keting their TW card. This event just served to exacerbate an
on-going conflict between these two Gum Co. which eventually
led to the demise of Bowman.

This I know from having seen official litigation documents when
I visited with George Moll back in 1981. As you probably know, the
George Moll Adv. Agency (Phila.) was the driving force behind all
PlayBalls, Horrors of War, War Gum, and all the Bowman cards. His
agency was contracted by the Warren Bowman Co.

And, you prove my point, by perpetuating the myth of "broken plates"
regarding the T206 Plank. What proof do you have of this ?
The story I heard many years ago was that the Plank card was in very
close proximity to the Wagner card on the sheet they were printed on.
And, when they were cutting up the sheet to discard the Wagner cards
many of the Plank's were inadvertently discarded, also.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

None, and I never claimed to. I am not perpetuating a myth. I merely stated that the broken plate story was the explanation for the Plank, in response to the statement that the 1954 Williams Bowman was the result of a broken plate. As you agree, the Williams resulted from a threat of contract litigation, nothing more.

The broken plate story as to the Plank is repeated in various early hobby resources (The Complete Book of Baseball Cards, Steve Clark, page 55; The Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, Lew Lipset, Vol. 3 page 54). Lipset's note in regard to the 150 and 350 backs on the Plank card indicated that the story of the broken plate was coming under fire. Where that story stands now is hard to say. I have seen it repeated in auction catalogs and popular renditions of card history. It has also been criticized. Personally, I don't care which way it goes since I have no skin in the game. That said, until you have definitive proof of an explanation, the broken plate story is as good as anything else. Whether you choose to accept it is up to you; definitively labeling it a "myth" implies you have knowledge of facts that you clearly do not know. None of us do.

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

In regards to the broken plate myth.

Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert

I don't buy this broken plate theory because in would affect multiple players all on the same sheet that the Plank was printed on would it not? Or maybe that one plate consisted of the Plank, Demmitt, O'Hara, Wagner, Magie, Shappe, etc...but then they all have different backs to go with it. So that theory is bunk IMO...we will probable never now the truth and we coul'nt handle the truth anyways.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I don't recall Plank being the card next to Wagner on the uncut T206 strip, so I don't see how a problem removing Wagner would lead to a problem with Plank but not the cards we know were next to Wagner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Adam W.

Myths are funny things, usually applied to some ancient Greek
warriors and their exploits. Troy (and the Trojan Horse) were
an outstanding example of a Myth. Until Heinrich Schliemann
defied all odds and discovered Troy approx. 150 years ago and
confirmed a lot of Homer's writings. Nevertheless, this story
is still considered a "myth" by many.

So, I do not understand your criticism of my use of this word
to describe the "broken plate" theory, which has been passed
thru several generations of hobbyist in order to explain why
certain cards are rare.

I'm certainly no expert on printing processes (although I did
have 2 yrs. of Print Class in HS), but I do know that multiple
plates are created in the process of printing. Did you read my
above post where there were multiple plates of the Ted Williams
image in the 1954 Bowman "find" ?

To produce color printing takes at least 4 stages, it is somewhat
of a time consuming process. To mass produce BB cards printers
must create multiple impressions of a given image (multiple plates)
to efficiently do the job and get product out to the market.

Finally, the strip you referred to with Wagner is just a horizontal
strip. The T206's were printed in sheet form (i.e., rows and columns)
My contention (based on information I gleaned back in the early 1980's)
was that Plank was adjacent to Wagner in a column. And, it does not
take much imagination to see how Plank could have been discarded along
with Wagner.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

so why is it that all of the "2-name" T206 miscuts have the same guy's name at the top and bottom? Sounds to me like the sheets had vertical columns of the same cards. Until you can show me a T206 sheet or strip placing Plank and Wagner in proximity, all theories as to how the Plank card came to be rare are just theories.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

It goes without saying, that many T206's were multiply
printed in vertical form. All serious T206 collectors
have these "anamolies" that you described. But, without
a complete uncut sheet (or a partial one), we are left
with only our conjecture on this subject. And, I find
it very strange that we have never seen any such uncut
sheets. All 10 of the 1933 Goudey sheets have surfaced;
and many uncut sheets from various issues are available.

But, now your argument here only further reinforces my
contention of multi-plate images of the same player.
So, are you now backing off from the old "broken plate
syndrome" regarding Plank ?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I agree with Ted that it is unusual that a T206 sheet has never been found. I've seen Old Judge sheets, a Buchner Gold Coin sheet, E93's, all 1930's cards upwards, but never a T205, 06, or 07. But it is clear that the same player did appear vertically as Adam pointed out. A Plank and and Wagner on the same sheet- I think it's doubtful because my guess is each is rare for a different reason, even though I admit I don't know what each of those reasons are.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Based on the only known evidence to date, I would say that the T206 Wagner and Plank are indeed on the same sheet.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Really, I am curious as heck, Mike. If there are no sheets and no photos of sheets and no information re sheets, what is there besides conjecture?

And Ted, I don't know how to more clearly say this: I don't advocate for any theory as to the Plank. I brought up the plate story because someone stated that was the reason for the 1954 Williams short print when I knew otherwise, and I suspected that the poster confused the stories. That's all. I'm not arguing "for" the plate theory any more than any other theory. I am a pure agnostic in this area; I have no idea as to the ultimate truth. You seem to be the "atheist" arguing conclusively against the plate theory without evidence either way to support it.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Wagner is known in both Piedmont and Sweet Cap 150. Plank is known in Piedmont 150 and 350. There is only one combination there where they could appear on the same sheet.

[Archive]

Posted By: scott ingold

This is informative as hell.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

barry,

Actually, the Plank typically comes with either Sweet Caporal 150 or 350 (although mostly 150, I believe). There are also three examples of the card known with a Piedmont 150 reverse. There is at least one occurrence where Plank and Wagner were on the same sheet (Piedmont 150). This is the only (and best) evidence the hobby has to date.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

There is an uncut T206 strip with Wagner in the middle. Plank is not on either side. I don't think much of the "accidentally cut up the Planks" theory.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

The Magie error card has a Piedmont 150 back.

I've had two of them and they both had the same
back. Can anyone else confirm my observation on
this rare T206 ?

So, we have developing here in our discussion a
common sheet (Piedmont 150 backs) comprising the
three most rare cards in the set. And, let's assume
this is true, then I can imagine the employees at
the printing plant were not going to "screw around"
cutting up "paper dolls". They were instructed to
discard all the Wagner cards on the 1st press runs
so they took the easy way out and disposed of the
entire sheets. It's no more complicated than that.
Unfortunately, Plank and Magie and many more cards
went into the garbage in the process.

But, the availability of all the other cards on this
unique sheet, was not affected to any great degree
since they were printed on subsequent press runs
with different backs.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

JOE P.

You have a Doyle.....what Tobacco back does it have ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug

"so why is it that all of the "2-name" T206 miscuts have the same guy's name at the top and bottom? Sounds to me like the sheets had vertical columns of the same cards."

not always true. I have a Pickering with "Snodgrass, N.Y. Nat'l" at the top

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

Among other things, this computer illiterate is going through an adjustment period.
From windows 95 installed in 1998, (or was that 1898) to a windows XP.
AOL version 5.0 to AOL version 9.0.
From a Compaq Presario 2200 to an emachine T6003 tower with all kinds of memory.
Can't wait till I hook up the new printer/scanner/copier Epson stylus cx6600 -- whatever that is.

Ted, you might ask, "What the hell does this have to do with your question about the Doyle Error back?"

Absolutely nothing!
I'm so excited with the three stage jump from 95 to XP, plus the experience of viewing the adjustment on my new slim Jim screen.
Ted, it couldn't get any better than this.

You have to remember, I'm pre TV.
I was raised listening to "Jack Armstrog, the All American Boy" on the RADIO.

I haven't looked at the Plank, Magie and Doyle error in quite awhile.
I'll go to the box, and check out all the backs for you.
I'll let you know.
Joe P.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Joe, it does get better. You need to get a 46" LCD tv, a DVI-HDMI cable and truly enjoy your computer on a big screen

Jay

My place is full of valuable, worthless junk.

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

It would blow my mind, but what a way to go.

Er uh, make that the second best way of going.
Joe P.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

<<I am happy to say that I still have the glee, enjoyment and satisfaction whenever I add a needed card to my set.>>

I can understand that, given you have every reasonably-obtained card in the t205 and t206 set - adding a t206 Plank or Wagner might give you a bit of glee!

But I seem to recall seeing you pick up the odd t207 every now and then recently - are you anywhere near completing that set?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Mike- Unless I am misunderstanding something in your last post, have you or anyone ever seen an uncut sheet of T206? Other than the proof strip with Wagner I can't recall ever hearing of even a two-card panel or partial sheet. How do you base your theory of Wagner and Plank being on the same sheet? Let's assume someone found one with Piedmont 150 backs. Are you saying that if a Wagner was on it, a Plank would be too? And as a final question- does any of this have to do with the PSA-8 Wagner and its origin?

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

Hi Barry, the original question was about the t206 Wagner in general, not the "the infamous one" once owned by "the great one".

The "Plank next to Wagner" theory doesn't make much sense to me, but anything's possible.

Unless Wagner was on the edge of the sheet, there would be another rare card on his other side. But even if that were the case, it still doesn't seem probable to me - if Wagners were cut out and destroyed that would explain early Planks not being around, but I would expect that rather than cutting out Wagners every time they printed that sheet, they would instead replace the Wagner image with a different card and leave the Plank image alone, in which case there would still be plenty of Planks in existence.

Another thought (bear with me as this gets complicated), if the Wagner image were actually replaced rather than card cut out after production, then take a look at the "proof strip" and the cards to either side of Wagner. Are there any "2 card side to side" scraps of either of these cards with part of another card shown in Wagner's position?

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

There are so few T206 known with other cards connected to them- either uncut pairs, partial sheets, panels, anything- that it is tough for us to get any sense of how they were produced. I think all we have ever gleaned with certainty is the same card appears on the sheet in vertical rows. But I feel the reasons for the rarity of Plank and Wagner are different because Plank was reissued in the 350 series, Wagner wasn't. I still can't say to this day exactly why either is rare, but I can say with a measure of confidence that each is rare for a different reason.

[Archive]

Posted By: ChuckkieB

I just wanted to say that as a frequent lurker and part time poster, it is threads like this that make this forum an absolute pleasure to be a part of.

Thanks to all of you who continue to contribute your knowledge to this forum.


CB

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

Hey Joe October 11 2005, 11:06 AM

<<I am happy to say that I still have the glee, enjoyment and satisfaction whenever I add a needed card to my set.>>

"I can understand that, given you have every reasonably-obtained card in the t205 and t206 set - adding a t206 Plank or Wagner might give you a bit of glee!"
*
*
*
Scott, If we're talking about the current prices, you're absolutely right - BUT!
Back in the mid 1980's, my insanity came out of the closet and started going after the scarcer cards.
Please believe me when I tell you that I'm not a wealthy person, just a little unbalanced and taking a shot is an option.

An example:
The Lipset Doyle error card.
The list of heavy hitters could be found in the Who's Who of card collecting. - I had no business being in that Poker game.
It was the highest reasonably-obtained price paid for a card at that time.
What was I thinking?
The good folks here at Chumley's Rest, always draw a smile when they think about that one.

As for my last need in the T206 set, the Wagner - even a nut knows when to draw a line - BUT!
In the word of a great ball player, [YouNeverKnow]
-----------------------------------

"But I seem to recall seeing you pick up the odd t207 every now and then recently - are you anywhere near completing that set?"
*
*
*
Nope!
I have a long way to go, it's about half done.

Currently, my concentration is on two other sets.

Stay well,
Joe P.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

Plank might have originally been an oversight or he was late to agree that his image could be used. 2 Possible scenarios of what then might have happened:

1)We know that in most cases each column had the same player's image - there are only a few examples of "2 name" cards with different names. Perhaps one image in a column was replaced with Plank's. This would make the Plank more rare, but probably not rare enough. If there were 20 images of a player per column, this would only make Plank 1/20th as rare as a normal image.

2) But, getting back to the few examples of "2 name" cards with different names. Maybe these were 'special' sheet(s) set up for unknown reasons and Plank was on such a sheet. It could also be that those ugly "yellow/brown" scraps we see were tests for such a sheet - there is indeed a Plank example. It would be really interesting to find a "2 name" "yellow/brown" card (those cards also have red, but generally a very small amount).

All wild theories, but if you plant these seeds in your mind, then when (if) supporting evidence shows up the light bulb might go off.

I'll sit back and wait for someone like Pete to explain why I'm totally nuts.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Bill Heitman (T206 - The Monster) confirms my earlier
observation that Magie exists only with a Piedmont 150
Subjects back.

Now, before we proceed; "150 Subjects" tells us that
the first press runs of T206's included 150 different
players in this 1st series (actually it was 156 diff.).
The sheets comprising this 1st series probably rolled
off the presses in arrays of 50, 100, or 150 cards.
You can bet that all the major players from the 1908 BB
season were included in this 1st printing (e.g., Cobb,
Matty, Johnson, Plank, Wagner, and yes Sherwood Magee).

Now my theory is in the form of the following scenerio:
At every printing facility there is some form of Quality
Control (QC) and when this 1st series was printed there
were the usual initial production flaws. One we do know;
it was the miss-spelling of Magee. Furthermore, Wagner
(as the story goes) did not want to be associated with
tobacco products. So, QC decides to dispose of most
of the sheets in this initial press run.

Of course a very few of these sheets got cut down into
cards that did find their way into tobacco packs. Recent
surveys tell us there are approximately the same number
of Wagner's as Magie error cards; and, there is about
twice as many Planks. Of course we know that Plank was
also in the 350 Series.

Additionally, in the 150 Series are some of the semi-
tough cards like G. Brown (Chi), M. Brown (Cubs), Burch
(batting), Donlin (fielding), Evers (Cubs), Pattee, Pelty
(horiz), and Reulbach (Cubs).

Finally, I'll close by noting that the 1956 Pitt Pirates
Yearbook has a picture of Wagner with a lit Cigar in his
hand.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

So what's your theory about Plank?

[Archive]

Posted By: tobacco-r-us

Doyle -- Piedmont 350 - Fact # 25 VA

Plank -- Sweet Caporal 350 - Fact # 30 NY

Magie -- Piedmont 150

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

JOE P.

Thanks much for back info. on your T206 "biggies".

SCOTT

Sorry, about the long-winded post; but, my argument
is simply based on the following known recorded data:

Magie......only exists as a PIEDMONT 150

Wagner.....all are from the 1st series (150)

Plank......very few are PIEDMONT 150

Therefore, as stated in above post, my logical conclusion
is that during the very 1st press runs entire (or partial)
sheets containing these three cards were destroyed due
to initial printing flaws. However, obviously we do know
that a few sheets got by Quality Control. This number of
sheets would be less than 100; and, that I am basing this
on the approximate "population" of Wagner's and Magie's
in existence presently in the hobby.

The Plank printed in the 2nd Series (350 Subjects) at
this point, I have no explanation for.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

I didn't follow your point in the earlier post, but I get it now.

You are linking the removal of those three cards from the set with the discovery of printing flaws on other cards, concluding that all of these decisions were made at the same time, which to me seems unlikely. The other fly in the ointment is the different backs, especially the 350 series.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

What's fascinating here is that with all the knowledge the vintage card hobby has about virtually every aspect of each card set, something as basic as the rarity of the big three in the exhaustively studied T206 set is still a mystery and still escapes consensus.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

Ted could very well be right. Perhaps a bunch of early sheets were destroyed because of print flaws and they figured while they were fixing those images they would get rid of Plank and Wagner as well, Plank for unknown reasons. Then Plank reappeared briefly in another series and disappeared again for some unrelated and also unknown reason.

It also is weird that there are no stories about printing these cards, especailly from the early years of the hobby when those involved would still have been alive.